| Title |
Social Fear Learning: from Animal Models to Human Function
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tics.2017.04.010 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacek Debiec, Andreas Olsson |
| Abstract |
Learning about potential threats is critical for survival. Learned fear responses are acquired either through direct experiences or indirectly through social transmission. Social fear learning (SFL), also known as vicarious fear learning, is a paradigm successfully used for studying the transmission of threat information between individuals. Animal and human studies have begun to elucidate the behavioral, neural and molecular mechanisms of SFL. Recent research suggests that social learning mechanisms underlie a wide range of adaptive and maladaptive phenomena, from supporting flexible avoidance in dynamic environments to intergenerational transmission of trauma and anxiety disorders. This review discusses recent advances in SFL studies and their implications for basic, social and clinical sciences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 167 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 57 | 34% |
| Canada | 7 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 4% |
| Hong Kong | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 2 | 1% |
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 71 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 111 | 66% |
| Scientists | 42 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 329 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 325 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 16% |
| Researcher | 46 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 41 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 62 | 19% |
| Unknown | 65 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 96 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 56 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 41 | 12% |
| Unknown | 88 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 413. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2022.
All research outputs
#72,227
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Cognitive Sciences
#28
of 2,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,602
of 328,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Cognitive Sciences
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.